Legal Opinion

Melone v. Ruffino

California Supreme Court

Decided August 14, 1900No. S.F. No. 1667PublishedCited by 54 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT

Action on a contract, entered into by defendant’s testator and plaintiff’s assignor for the sale of land by the former to the latter, to recover the deposit made by plaintiff on account of the purchase. Plaintiff had judgment for the amount of deposit, to wit, nine hundred and twenty-two dollars and fifty cents, being ten per cent of the purchase price of the land, and also for interest thereon from June 10, 1893, amounting in all to twelve hundred and thirty-six dollars and eighty cents, and for costs. Defendant appeals from the judgment on bill of exceptions. The contracts, the…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Southern Pacific Co. v. Von Schmidt Dredge Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Robinson v. Easton Eldridge & Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Caulfield v. SandersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
  4. Blanchard v. KaullCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
  5. Conner v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. Estate of LatourCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Stuart v. LordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. T. M. Sinclair & Co. v. National Surety Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1906
  4. Taboada v. Sociedad Espanola De Beneficencia MutuaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Pastene v. PardiniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API